Of course some do, but there are just as many (and a bit more) that under perform. The average performance relative to the index matters.

Yes, but that’s not what the comment I’m replying to said. There seems to be some pervasive belief that absolutely no one ever beats the S&P500 index in the long run, which is obviously nonsense.

There is a chance to beat the market, just as there is a chance to beat the house.

Absolutely no normal person beats it except by dumb luck

If I spent the last 20 years allocating 90% of my savings to SPY, and the remaining 10% in a large-cap tech focussed index, I’ve outperformed SPY. Is that dumb luck or is it a pretty trivial implementation of a sensible investment thesis?

There’s nothing magical about some committee-curated collection of 500 US-only equities which means it outperforms every other option ipso facto.

If you were talking about a normal person actively managing a portfolio I’d be more inclined to agree.